Like clockwork, another op-ed article bashing the theory of intelligent design appeared in the Los Angeles Times on Friday (February 24, 2006). Friday's column is just the latest of several op-eds or editorials assaulting intelligent design that have appeared in the Times in the last eight months. Past pieces, which are almost on a monthly basis, are here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
It is yet another example of how the Times often seems incapable of fairly addressing both sides of a controversial issue. Some of the Times' articles have asserted that intelligent design is "not science" and have suggested that it is basically "creationism" under a different name. Both propositions are simply false. (See readings below.)
Can't the Times find room some day for just one leading proponent of intelligent design theory in its opinion pages to accurately and honestly articulate its position? The Times could easily choose from any of the following leading voices: Lee Strobel, Jay Wesley Richards, Guillermo Gonzalez (Ph.D. in astronomy), Michael Behe (Ph.D. in biochemistry), William Dembski (M.S. in statistics, Ph.D in mathematics), Stephen Meyer, Jonathan Wells (Ph.D., Molecular and Cell Biology), and J.P. Moreland. There's more ...
Many people, including conservatives, have false perceptions about intelligent design theory. Do you? What is Intelligent Design? by Jay Richards is a good primer. Also try this article, this one, this, and/or this. It's good reading!
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.